Leaderboard

People are spending more time going around the outside with a magnifier instead of flying the damn thing..... In one thread complaining on the hardware demands of something like the Apache, in the other hating on Polychop for going light in texture resolution. There is no winning in this game. I think from any reasonable angle and distance the KW looks perfectly fine. I'd rather have PC polish some gameplay elements or stuff insight the cockpit where I will spend most of my time! In the meantime I just enjoy flying it!

Nope, I have probably spent more than 100 hours trying to get the current assets working again since the May 22th update. I'd rather be developing new stuff to be honest.

First post updated. I added all mods to one arhive. B-47 is WIP, now it has low res textures and equipped only with GAM-63 missile. Pinpoint strike up to 190 km, low accuracy, powerful warhead. Use 5-6 missiles against SAM site. Missile for now has test paintings. Other changes: Tu-22KD and Tu-22D have new textures as mentioned earlier. B-29 has been deleted from pack. FAB-3000 and FAB-9000 now deal area damage. RCS of KSR-5 increased.

Accusing PC of deception is a serious accusation. A company not meeting your expectations is not deception. The irony is - out of all this - it's content in your posts that come across as being deceptive. Accusing PC of deception when they haven't been. Or acting surprised and victimised after buying, when you posted and knew these issues existed prior to sale - those would be far closer to meeting the definition of deception, than someone not releasing a product that doesn't live up to your standards. This whole drama reminds me of a soccer player way over reacting from a small brush that they knew was coming - falling down hugging his arm or leg on the ground as if they're in so much pain crying out foul and violence when there was none. It really is overly dramatic. All that has occurred here is that your expectations and standards are far higher than ED's. And that's fine. You have a right to be disappointed. That's truly unfortunate. Everyone has different expectations and reviews can show that. But - ED gave their stamp of approval for the current model being full price, and for it being released in it's current state. There's been tones of video's prior. You were aware of these issues prior. There is no deception by PC, no coverup. There is just your expectations, and that polychop and ED failed to meet your expectations. So, you disagree with the price vs the quality you view. You have a different view on what EA vs non-EA means compared to ED. (Although I find it strange that your focus - which borders on obsession is at PC, and not ED really - given ED are the gatekeepers in all this). That's OK - that doesn't mean they're being deceptive. Do you go down to the local furniture shop, see a TV that's priced too much and yell "This business is being deceptive?" because the price is too high for the quality? At that price it should be 4K, not HD? No - that'd be silly. But that's what it appears you're doing here with the accusations made about polychop's character. There was no pre-order on this product where they didn't deliver what they originally announced and you paid for it before release. You could see what you were getting from the video's. You could have waited 24hrs to see what was released. No one is trying to hide the truth here, as you falsely accuse us of. The accusations about this being a toxic thread is sadly accurate. It's got nothing to do with the quality of the module, nor even the differences between your expectations and others, but the content of posts that respond or attack people that disagree as 'hiding the truth'. That's your opinion - which you're entitled to. But that doesn't make them deceptive. The atmosphere of this thread really needs to change directions. At present, it just seems a small group of people are rushing to a housefire to throw gasoline on it instead of water, while others are trying to bring reason to the table. Maybe some people are just getting kicks out of drama? I don't know. With DCS going through so much at the moment in other areas, it'd be really nice to see cooler heads prevail and the community head towards unity instead of division and us to be able to discuss things, and even disagree amicably and get back to constructive criticism instead of false accusations.

Military Asset Pack Sweden 1.0.1 released! Changelog Version 1.0.1 Changed radars reflection and countermeasures parameters Fixed Artillerisystem 08 M982 Excalibur issues Fixed CV 9050 missile issues Fixed RBS 58 missile issues Fixed RBS 98 missile issues Fixed ship radars issue making them less visible Fixed Visby Corvette missile issues Distribution model This Military Asset Pack is available in the following versions: The standard full download. The incremental download which updates 1.0.0 to 1.0.1 and contains only the changed files. You apply it by overwriting your 1.0.0 installation. Special thanks A special thanks goes out to @daskjdhjah for a tremendous testing effort!

Hey Crud, RIMPAC is a great opportunity to work with ships from other nations but don't get caught out during morning or evening colors. Every country represented does colors every morning and evening and if you caught out on base. You have to stand at attention on base until there all finished. Thanks, RWC. Yes, Sebfoo I think your AV is very sensitive to downloading from the web. The mods are safe for download. PM me if you're still having issues downloading the mods. Hey Lukafred, it's good to hear you want to start creating 3d models. Unfortunately, there's no official guide. ED has a couple guides but they just show you how to setup 3ds max for modeling. 90% of what I learned was on my own and the other 10% was a few people showing me exactly how to create the mods for DCS. I learned 3DS max on my own and watched videos on YouTube and advice from others. My first recommendation is to learn how to use the Software to create the mods. Blender and 3ds Max are the top two applications used to create mods for DCS i think. If you understand how to use the software already then the first thing would be to learn how to create and texture a simple mod and import it into DCS. it can be anything. You can import a mod of a goat or just square box. Anything. I can create a sample DCS Mod file if you like. All you have to do is change the name of the mod. Once you learn to import the mods then you can learn to animate the file. I will create a sample file over the next few days and share it here with everyone in case someone else wants to learn. **ITALIAN MOD UPDATE** - Both are successfully gunning down targets in DCS. I'm still working on the FREMM mod. I will be working on the Missiles this week. One thing I've learned about using Substance Painter is the mod may look great in SP but it may look different in 3DS Max and in DCS. So it requires going back and forth until you get it right. So it's a bit more work but it's all about learning to texture mods in Substance Painter. I think I mentioned it already. There will be three versions of the FREMM Frigate. Two Italian versions one with a different bow gun and an Egyptian version. What you see To save time I will create the Andrea Doria and the Forbin together afterward because they are very similar mods. I may release them with the Cavour. Not sure yet. We'll see how it goes. So still work to do. Stay Tuned! Thanks.

Your comparing a 150 to 170 man "top of there game" team to a 3 man team.

Textures, especially the normal maps are only at 30% where they should be in 2024. The whole 3D model looks more like something that would be used as an AI object in a game. The Apache is simply state-of-the-art. It demonstrates up-to-date texturing artist craftmanship.

For recon missions over Kola. Also it was a carrier of GAM-63 missile.

Maybe I missed it- The statement from Polychop that this was the finished version of the module and that baring changes in the DCS core module no further changes or updates would be needed. Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? My point is that Polychop has been working on this for years, and years that included a major economic downturn due to Covid. I gather they are a small company that does not perhaps have the resources of larger companies such as ED, resources that allow them to weather economic downturns. Maybe they could not afford to release this at a discounted price. Maybe they needed to sell the module at full price to keep improving this module and to support the Gazelle module. I don't have the Gazelle module but from what I have read it was pretty rough when released and was difficult to fly due to issues with the flight model but that Polychop has released updates that greatly improved the module. So it seems to me that if Polychop can stay in business we can expect them to continue to improve the Kiowa module and who knows, perhaps even in the future, release an AH-6/MH-6 module with "theoretical" avionics and weapons systems (because the AH-6 and MH-6 are still in active service with the 160th SOAR, using classified equipment). This brings up the business aspect of flight sims and even more niche, military flight sims. Yes, computer gaming is a huge business with sales exceeding that of mainstream entertainment categories. But flight sims and military flight simes in particular are a miniscule part of the computer gaming industry. There just isn't the revenue from flight sims to match that of other genres. And do you think that civilian aviation sims would be at the level they are currently if it were not for the deep pockets of Microsoft? The way I see it, anything we can do to support Eagle Dynamics, Polychop and the other companies producing the modules, the better our experience in DCS will be. Frankly I am surprised that DCS World is freeware and that, given the time and effort required to produce these aviation modules and maps, that they only cost 70 -80 dollars. I could easily see DCS World being a subscription software, charging 60-120 dollars per year and modules charging for non patch major upgrades. When you think about it, all Polchop has done is to do away with a pre-release 20-30% discount. You don't get early access (unless you are a beta tester). When it is released at full price you have access to a module that still requires updates and upgrades. The fantastic looking F-4E Phantom from Heatblur is now on sales for it's full retail price, it was released 19 days ago. And have you seen the amount of bug fixes and module improvements ( over 110 ) that came with the DCS update 5 days ago? What are you getting for your 15-20 dollar discount? Not early access, not a pre-patched version, you are just getting a small discount on a module that is not yet finished. What are the complaints about the OH-58D? The graphics could be improved? I guess, certainly compared to the photorealistic F-4E, but it could be improved in the future. Somewhat wonky sound? Yes, but the post from Polychop today re the partnership with Echo 19 sounds like upgraded audio will be released in the future. Damage modeling? I don't know about that, it seemed pretty good when I had a complete drivetrain failure requiring an (attempted) auto rotation after over torquing the helicopter. That seemed pretty sophisticated, though I can't say if that was accurately modeled as would have happened in real life. Airbags in the face when I set it down too hard? I was impressed. Flight model too easy? I can't judge that since I have never flown a helicopter in real life let alone an OH-58D. I will defer to Casmo on that, he walked the walk so I believe him when he talks the talk. Besides, given that our controls are not as in real life and that we lack the situational awareness as in real life, well perhaps compromises are unavoidable. I'm a rookie at flight sim helicopter pilot ( first flew Jane's Longbow in 1995 or 96 but had a long hiatus from flight sims as my career commitments left little time for anything as demanding as full fidelity flight sims such a Falcon 4.0 and then Falcon BMS and eventually DCS World. Having that perspective, starting PC flight sims in the early 1990's when you had to run them in MS-DOS and configure the PC using command line code to enable the PC to run the sim I am totally blown away with the flight sims we now have access to. Perhaps that is why I am not as bothered by these areas that can ( and likely will ) be improved. I don't regret buying this module even at full price. Can it be improved? Of course, but is it finished enough to fly and fight? From what I have seen the answer is yes. So I will support this hobby of ours, paying full retail if necessary, it's in all our best interests to keep these companies in business. I would rather have an OH-58D module that may need some improvements than having no module at all. So yes, I will pay an extra 15-20 dollars to support our hobby.

Military Asset Pack UK 1.0.2 released! Changelog Version 1.0.2 Added Type 26 Frigate Phalanx trajectory forecast Added Type 45 Destroyer Phalanx trajectory forecast Changed Type 26 Frigate Phalanx maximum engagement range Changed Type 45 Destroyer Aster 30 exhaust smoke Changed Type 45 Destroyer Phalanx maximum engagement range Fixed Type 26 Frigate SAM issues Fixed Type 45 Destroyer SAM issues Removed Type 26 Frigate Phalanx burst mode Removed Type 45 Destroyer Phalanx burst mode Distribution model This Military Asset Pack is available in the following versions: The standard full download. The incremental download which updates 1.0.0+ to 1.0.2 and contains only the changed files. You apply it by overwriting your 1.0.0+ installation. Special thanks A special thanks goes out to @daskjdhjah for a tremendous testing effort!

Absolutely the Kiowa is one of the finest 3rd party releases in dcs history.

Further, the Phantom has two glass layers and one of them has extra sunblocking coating on it. The issue existed IRL as well and they just looked around the glass if needed by moving their head slightly. Obviously not an option for everyone, especially outside VR... Its unfortunatelly really tricky to configure the glass to look proper in all lighting situations in DCS. Multiple weeks have been sunken just into that Thanks though, we will look into it.

I find the topic really amusing. I remember we had a meeting once where we discussed if we should model the tailhook feature for EA. Given that its not a carrier rated plane and even thinking about using the hook for anything other than airfield emergency landings is a sin. We concluded that its top priority because it will be the very first thing DCS players will want to try out, lol. I could feel the SMEs shaking their heads slowly [emoji51] Thanks for the suggestions in this thread. We will talk about it and see if there is something we can and want to do about it. Its right though that our schedule is very packed.

Small texture improvement for B-47 in next update

My little contribution to the mod to spread the word more, I like it. Hope you enjoy this one:

IMHO: Bloody hell (mea culpa- excuse me), what a lovely bird to fly!Just got in first time, starting hot, and up you go. Never had that experience before, to feel at home without any training before on that thing. Just GREAT - only that sound.... And, sorry folks, didn't count the rivets and bolts - just flew. Thanks Polychop

Ahoi, nach langer Überlegung habe ich mich nun doch dazu entschlossen mein F-16 Teilcockpit zu verkaufen. Es handelt sich hier um einen Prototyp, welcher mal entworfen und gebaut wurde um so eine Art MIP wie von Winwing für die F16 auf den Markt zu bringen. Die Hauptkonstruktion besteht aus frontseitig schwarz lackiertem MFD und ein Teil sind 3d gedruckte Kunststoffteile. Das Glareshield ist aus heißgeformten Kunststoff, die Scheibe des HUD aus Plexiglas. Einige Instrumente sind Atrappen. Alles ist vernünftig miteinander Verschraubt, geklebte Verbindungen gibt es nur sehr wenige. Bauteile mit Funktion (welche natürlich ohne jeden Mangel gegeben sind) sind: - Das ICP (LT-Version) von Simgears - 3x MFD (Rahmen) von Thrustmaster - Über ein 32-Kanal -DI Board: - Radio Frequency Switch - Laser Arm Switch - Master Arm Switch - Autopilot Roll Mode Switch - Autopilot Pitch Mode Switch Die Schalter sind aus Metall und haben alle die originale Rasterung. Montiert sind die Schalter auf einer Frontplatte mit gefräster Beschriftung inkl. Hintergrundbeleuchtung. - Das DED hat auch einen USB-Anschluss, hab ich aber nie zum laufen bekommen bzw. mich auch nicht weiter mit beschäftigt, da für mich uninteressant. Uninteressant deshalb, da ich ausschließlich in VR fliege und es somit sowieso nicht sehen kann. VR ist aber auch der Grund, weshalb ich mich vom Ganzen trennen möchte. Ich komm in VR überhaupt nicht damit klar Tasten fernab vom HOTAS zu bedienen....das dauert mich alles immer viel zu lange. Da bin ich in VR mit PointCntrl um einiges schneller und konnte mich nie so richtig an die "echten" Tasten und Schalter des Cockpits gewöhnen. Alle aktiven Komponenten werden über ein USB-HUB mit dedizierter Spannungsversorgung an den PC angeschlossen. Die ganze Konstruktion lässt sich bequem per Klemmung an den Schreibtisch adaptieren und auch schnell wieder demontieren. Bei Bedarf kann ich weitere Detailbilder machen. Wie geschrieben, mit VR komm ich einfach nicht damit klar und es ist mir viel zu schade hier stehen zu haben und verstauben zu lassen. So suche ich nun jemanden der mehr Freude damit hat (vielleicht auch mit VR). Versenden wäre sicherlich möglich, aber die Gefahr das etwas kaputt geht ist dann schon recht groß (wobei ich es natürlich entsprechend gut einpacken würde). Abholung im Raum Wuppertal / Köln klar bevorzugt! Preislich ist sowas immer schwierig zu bewerten...ich würde jetzt mal 600€ VB ansetzen.

Here are a couple of important USAF units that flew the F-4E in the 1980s timeframe. I hope I got most of the major ones. In addition, there are probably also various additional Guard and Reserves units. Also if you include all of the 1970s there will be many more. This is all compiled from wiki, so take it with a grain of salt. West Germany 86th TFW, Ramstein 512 TFS, 1976-1985, to F-16C 526 TFS, 1973-1986, to F-16C 52nd TFW, Spangdahlem (European Wild Weasel Wing) 23 TFS, 1982-1987 (mixed F-4E/F-4G), to F-4G/F-16C 81 TFS, 1984-1988 (mixed F-4E/F-4G), to F-4G/F-16C 480 TFS, 1979-1983, 1983-1987 (mixed F-4E/F-4G), to F-4G/F-16C Iceland 57 FIS, Naval Air Station Keflavik, 1978-1985, to F-15C South Korea 51st TFW, Osan 36 TFS, 1973-1988, to F-16A 497 TFS, 1974-1988 Pilippines 3rd TFW, Clark 3 TFS, 1975-1991 90 TFS, 1977-1991 (mixed F-4E/F-4G), to F-15E USA 21st Composite Wing, Elmendorf AFB, Alaska 18 TFS, 1977-1981, to A-10A 43 TFS, 1970-1982, to F-15A 4th TFW, Seymour Johnson AFB, North Carolina (Rapid Deployment Force) 334 TFS, 1973-1989, to F-15E 335 TFS, 1974-1989, to F-15E 336 TFS, 1974-1988, to F-15E 337 TFS, 1982-1985 347th TFW, Moody AFB, Georgia 68 TFS, 1975-1987, to F-16A 69 TFS, 1983-1989, to F-16A 70 TFS, 1975-1987, to F-16A 339 TFS, 1976-1983

you can get it from Codename Flanker mod

You are overly dramatic about some poly’s you do not agree with. I on the other hand bought a solid piece of software.

Just got the Kiowa.... I have bought all of the helos on original release (I have been around too long) and Kiowa is great in all respects for the price. PC are a small concern and IMHO did well to weather the S*******m of the initial Gazelle FM, fix that and produce the Kiowa..... Sven's baby. As Nick of ED said they cannot financially produce a new model without an early release cash injection to finalise the model so Sven and polychop I congratulate you, Sure, things may need tidied some but that's expected, but overall a great release lads, thanks.... and yes The Gazelle is a joy now to fly.... Discussion, disagreement, opinion sensibly engaged are all healthy and good.... Currently the sad thing about ED forums and other Discords is the number of juveniles spewing nonsense anomalously from their keyboards... many create new accounts just for this purpose... sure look at Razbam's threads, many should not have been let out of baby care unsupervised...

How exactly do you believe that a DCS developer, can fix the wrong behavior of a piece of software of a different developer? It is you who should send the file to your AV support channel so they can fix their wrong detection.

Problem is, that the perceived volume of supporters and naggers doesn't reflect their real share. The latter are just more vocal....

There is a common misconception with the yellow ADI needles. They are not the ILS signal but the flight director, which is a different system. The actual ILS signal is shown on the sides, no needles.

The main issue here on the technical side is that you can't just do "if this or that situation, change the tint of the glass". You configure the material and then the DCS engine renders it. If you try to make it look better in dark situations it will look ridiculous in light situations and vice versa. Sometimes it will be completely invisible, sometimes full white. We have spend weeks tuning this glass and will probably have to spend even more on it.

VeRA paint as requested by many

Kickstarter backers participated at entirely their own risk. Luthier promised to deliver DCS aircraft modules with out finding out even if there was sufficient data to allow them to be modelled to the standard DCS demands. He gambled and you brought in on that gamble. The fact he lost and yet ED picked up and decided to honour even part of that debt makes you a darn sight more fortunate than a lot of other Kickstarter backers who backed other projects and saw no return on their <ahem> “investment”. I’d say be happy you got something, even if it wasn’t all that was promised by a party whose credentials have been found to be lacking.

OR... You could do what Tom Clancy did. I've created a decoy missile based on the KS-2 missile, which in real life did have a target drone variant, the KRM-2 (MV-1). This missile is based on the version from Tom Clancy's "Red Storm Rising" It has a launch range of plus 300 nautical miles and must be launched outside of the E-2 radar coverage. After launch the missile will climb to 34,000 ft then settle into a cruise altitude of 30,000 ft at 550 knots for about 260 miles. When giving a "CAP search in zone" order that includes anti ship missile in ME the ai F-14s will target the drones and waste their missiles on the decoys. BUT, if they see any other aircraft target first they ignore the decoys. Also the F-14 will continue to attack the decoy even at close range, but they will also go after the follow up Backfires with guns and any sidewinders they have left. As you can see from the pics you need a very large battle space. There are 48 F-14s up and an unknown, but plausible number of bombers. I've run the mission a few times and every time the ai F-14s go for the decoys. all the Badgers get away and enough Backfires get through to hurt the task force. I will make the decoy available to Tripod3 for review after a little more refinement. If you'd like to help me test and give it a try pm me.

The problem with the world is that people want to hide the truth. There is only one truth and we can never run away from it. You can ignore reality, but you can't ignore the consequences of ignoring reality. People can't argue back and come up with ready-made words... "They're crybabies" or "Everyone is toxic" and many other ready-made phrases.

Full price for... 1 - Poorly detailed 3D model. 2 - Low resolution textures. 3 - Sounds, I don't even need to comment, but everyone already knows the condition and Polychop has promised to fix it. 4 - Systems, according to the manual there are many unimplemented features, but I prefer not to comment because it could be a limitation of the DCS engine. 5 - Lack of animation on the ammunition belt when firing the .50. The ammunition is static and does not travel through the ammunition belt. 6 - FM, I prefer not to comment because I don't have the knowledge to do this, but from what I've seen pilots commenting. The Kiowa can't take off with 4xHellfires and 100% fuel and in the DCS this is possible. You can even hover. Maybe it's a bug. 7 - Many bugs, but this is expected for any computer system. With all these problems, Kiowa should be released in early access and not charge an absurd amount of 70 dollars as a "complete" module that looks more like a module from 10 years ago in DCS World.

"deceiving" because of 3D-cosmetics and textures? Your "critics" lack arguments. Polychop, just go on, please. If the functions and procedures of the Kiowa have been completed, polished and updated twice, you might consider some face-lifting, too.

South Atlantic (Razbam) map news: null

DCS Organic Panic - OPN (Beta Stage) DCS Organic Panic (OPN) is a script for Digital Combat Simulator that enhances the AI behavior of ground vehicles when under attack, and simulates vehicle crew. By integrating this script into your DCS missions, you can expect a more dynamic and realistic response from AI-controlled ground units, making your simulation experience more immersive and challenging. This is the first public release of the script, and it's on a beta stage, so it might have bugs and issues. Please reference the project's Github for instructions, limitations and submitting issues. Features DCS OPN tracks ground units stress over time, and changes the unit behavior based on the amount of stress. This script offers several key features that enhance the AI behavior of ground vehicles in DCS missions: Each ground unit stress level is tracked during the mission. Stress level decreases automatically over time, but can be increased by: Being hit by a weapon. Being close to a weapon impact Being close to a friendly unit being hit or destroyed Losing hitpoints The amount of stress added or removed depends on: Unit type (tank, APC, IFV, light armored, air defense, cargo truck, transport truck or car) Distance to the weapon impact. Distance to the friendly unit being hit or destroyed Amount of damage received When a unit's stress level starts to rise it will move and disperse. Each subsequent attacks near or on the unit will make it change position. If a unit's stress level rises and reaches a certain threshold, the following will happen: The unit will panic and move away from the attack zone. Then it will stop for a while, and then move to the vehicle fallback zone. Once in the fallback zone, the unit will stop and wait for a while before returning to the attack zone. If it has less than 70% health, it will stay in the fallback zone. IMPORTANT: At the present OPN version, units will not continue with their previous tasks after being attacked. If attacked again while in any of those states, the unit will always change positions, and may panic again. Ground unit crew is also simulated by the script: If a unit loses over 70% of its health or catches on fire, it's considered disabled, so it won't move or attack anymore. If a unit is disabled / on fire, the crew will dismount and later retreat to the infantry fallback zone. Different types of units have different crew sizes, and the crew will be spawned as infantry units. There's a 7% (configurable) chance that a crew member will spawn as a MANPADS. The amount of crew members spawned may vary between 0 and the max crew size of the unit. This is to simulate crew losses during the attack. There's a 30% (configurable) chance that units placed in the Mission Editor will spawn without a crew (to simulated parked vehicles). However it's possible to force a unit to have no crew or max crew size, by changing the name of the group (described below). Limitations Group Composition: Each group must consist of only one unit to be compatible with OPN's control mechanisms. Fallback Zones: Limited to one fallback zone for vehicles and one for infantry, per coalition. Waypoint Adherence: Units will abandon mission editor-defined waypoints upon entering a panic or dispersed state and will not resume them. Multiplayer Compatibility: OPN should work in multiplayer missions, but it wasn't tested yet. It's possible that some features may not work as expected. Since controlled units won't return to their tasks after being attacked, the compatibility with other scripts might be affected. Community Contributions DCS OPN is completely open to community contributions and ideas. At the moment, the script is on Open Beta stage, so a lot of things might change in the future. Having feedback from the community is extremely important for this proccess! Usage Rights Feel free to modify and redistribute DCS OPN. It's currently licensed under GPLv3, so the only restriction is that if you use DCS OPN, your product / project has to be open source. If you need to include it in closed source code, please get in contact so we can discuss it together. How to use it? DCS OPN is not a mod. It's a script you must include in you missions by using the DO SCRIPT or DO SCRIPT FILE triggers in the mission editor. Minimal setup is required in the mission for it to work. Please reference the documentation available here for full instructions. dcs-opn-v0_84beta.zip

Can we please get the MFD exports added to the white list on IC check. using a home cockpit with exports used to be easy and would allow me to us the cockpit that I've built in any server that I wanted to. However the IC Check now causes more kicks and frustration than does anything to help the "Fairness" on servers because someone has something different in the cockpit files. With the popularity of Helios and the availability of MFD's that we've seen in the last couple of years for home cockpits, this should be addressed and made so that its not as frustrating to get onto multiplayer servers.

I think it would be really cool and fun if we had the option to plop the F-4E onto an aircraft carrier and the catapult could work, even with no animations. Probably wouldn't work with the super carrier but who cares. Before people come in here with "it's not realistic" etc, don't bother I don't care. Facts: The Navy variant of the Heatblur Phantom is YEARS away Naval aviation is the coolest and most badass form of aviation The F-4E Phantom II for DCS World by Heatblur is amazing and I want to fly it off the Forrestal. This would not diminish from the realism or depth of the simulation in any way because mission makers could just not put it onto an aircraft carrier and nobody would even know. Thanks for coming to my thread. Heatblur, please consider this. I know it sounds like a joke but it really isn't

Hello, We need atleast few additional bindable jester commands. Radar - on/stdby Radar boresight - where he goes and manually boresights radar with ability to choose different ranges, atleast up to 50nm 10/25/50. This is hella important function for old system like that and you cant use it without 2nd human. Waiting for mod is not really viable either as this is one of the basics that should be present. And third one should be stab in/out so we can unstab radar to boresight line and chose wide/narrow. Last one - sparrow gates for boresight launches. We cant select different doppler widths with jester. Again one of the functions that should be in as basic option as it literally allows for potential launch on enemy hiding in clutter.

Um, this is awkward, but the Bell 407 (widely used civilian version) came from the advancements in the airframe and systems of the OH-58D. The Bell 206 came from the OH-58A. This flight model is very close to the feel of every light single-engine Bell helicopter I've flown. Stop throwing shade based on your assumptions.

ED says it’s been fixed internally. Fingers crossed!

Very nice! Depending on the outcome, are there any future plans for this project? Maybe crowdfunding and then sell DIY-kits (?) to all us Viggen freaks?

FWIW, my personal decision for a while now has been not to buy any more modules unless they can take off and land on an aircraft carrier, so no F4 for me. Thankfully all helo's fall into that category, and so can the C130. I don't know. There's something about carrier ops that have me hooked. Even though I have other non-carrier aircraft, I just tend not to fly them. What can I say? I guess I've fallen for the motto... Fly Navy

Hide the truth? Bro, you're getting push back, that's how it goes.

I had a similar issue and eventually noticed that the default keybind for both of those commands was 'LShift + D'. At first the persistent red exclamation point would completely block the pinky switch radar selection on joystick buttons, and no combination of disabling/enabling/re-scanning devices fixed it reliably. After starting over and deleting those double-assigned keybinds first, the situation improved but was not completely resolved. Now I only have to go to control manager and choose 'rescan devices' every time I start the game, which has been working reliably. I don't know if that will work in your situation. Edit - confirmed experimentally that this can be fixed completely by updating line 193 in "DCSWorld\Mods\aircraft\F-4E\Input\F-4E-Pilot\keyboard\default.lua" From: { name = _('Wheel Brake (Left)'), combos = combo('D', 'LShift'), pressed = iCommandLeftWheelBrake, up = iCommandLeftWheelBrake, value_pressed = -1, value_up = 1, category = { categories.gears_brakes_hook, categories.pedals } }, To: { name = _('Wheel Brake (Left)'), combos = combo('D', 'LCtrl'), pressed = iCommandLeftWheelBrake, up = iCommandLeftWheelBrake, value_pressed = -1, value_up = 1, category = { categories.gears_brakes_hook, categories.pedals } }, Then fixing the .diff file in 'Saved Games' folder to work with that. However this is still not a great solution because DCS updates will likely break the keybind again. There must be some reason that most players are not experiencing this, but I cannot figure out what it could be.

I hope you have had enough time to prepare for the Operation... Release is soon (tm).

This is the most toxic thread...

I don't want a refund because I like Kiowa, but I would love a future update that would bring Kiowa up to par with recent modules. I don't think that will happen and I would really like to be wrong and see Polychop correct everything I've said here.

Parts of the gear system, including but not limited to the tires, are not cleared for carrier operations. If you carrier-land regardless, you will put a lot of stress on the system and unless you are really good at it, it will likely even collapse. The hook is identical though.

News (Discord):